UNCLOS will not impose Kyoto obligations on parties that have not ratified it
The argument that Kyoto sets a standard for giving effect to LOSC Part XII is even less useful against developing States, or against developed States that are not parties to Kyoto. Developing States parties to Kyoto have no obliga- tion to reduce GHG emissions, even if, like India and China, they are large emitters of CO2. They will still be in compliance with Kyoto even if their CO2 emissions have greatly increased since 1997. They would not be in breach of LOSC Articles 192 and 194 if Kyoto defines the content of those Articles. With regard to the US, which is not a party to Kyoto or LOSC, it might be argued that it is bound by customary law to apply internationally agreed stan- dards on CO2 reductions in order to give effect to their obligation to protect the marine environment and other States from pollution. But the obvious dif- ficulty is that developed State parties to Kyoto have different percentage reduc- tions targets, and in some cases they are permitted to increase emissions. Taking Kyoto as a standard of diligence for non-parties simply begs the ques- tion—what standard and for whom?
Related argument(s) where this quote is used.
The terms of the Convention do not require Parties to comply with other international environmental treaties.Related Quotes:
- Convention will not act as a backdoor for other environmental agreements Senate has not ratified
- Ratifying UNCLOS would not subject U.S. to increased environmental liability or act as a back door for the Kyoto agreement
- UNCLOS will not impose Kyoto obligations on parties that have not ratified it
- Language in implementing advice and consent resolution limits self executability of UNCLOS tribunal decisions
- UNCLOS does not create a new forum for challenging U.S. climate change policies
- UNCLOS can in no way be interpreted or utilized as a climate change treaty